ReviewMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2024
A Review of Simulation Tools for Thin-Film Solar Cells.
Review in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- First-principles discovery of multifunctional KRSC advances · 2026Article
- Exploring lead-free ARSC advances · 2026Article
- A Science Mapping Analysis of Computational Methods and Exploration of Electrical Transport Studies in Solar Cells.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Economical Perovskite Solar Cell Enabled by Triple Cost-Reduction Strategies.Small science · 2026Article
- Time-Efficient, Accurate, and Experimentally Grounded Optical Modeling of Multiscale-Textured Thin-Film Solar Cells.Global challenges (Hoboken, NJ) · 2026Article
- Optimization of short-circuit current density for tailored active region in BiFeORSC advances · 2025Article
- Numerical Investigation of Perovskite/Silicon Heterojunction Tandem Solar Cell with a Dual-Functional Layer of MoOMaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Unlike current silicon-based photovoltaic technology, the development of last-generation thin-film solar cells has been marked by groundbreaking advancements in new materials and novel structures to increase performance and lower costs. However, physically building each new proposal to evaluate the device's efficiency can involve unnecessary effort and time. Numerical simulation tools provide a solution by allowing researchers to predict and optimize solar cell performance without physical testing. This paper reviews thirteen of the main numerical simulation tools for thin-film solar cells, including SCAPS, AMPS, AFORS-HET, ASPIN3, GPVDM, SESAME, SILVACO, SENTAURUS, and ADEPT. This review evaluates each tool's features, modeling methods, numerical approaches, and application contexts. The findings reveal notable differences in material modeling, numerical accuracy, cost, and accessibility among the tools. Each tool's strengths and limitations in simulating thin-film solar cells are highlighted. This study emphasizes the necessity of selecting suitable simulation tools based on specific research requirements. It provides a comparative analysis to assist researchers in choosing the most effective software for optimizing thin-film solar cells, contributing to advancements in photovoltaic technology.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.